TSCA Rule On Cadmium and Cadmium Compounds Withdrawn

EPA is withdrawing the final Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting Rule that it issued on December 3, 2012. The health and safety data reporting rule would have required manufacturers (including importers) of cadmium or cadmium compounds, including as part of an article, that have been, or are reasonably likely to be, incorporated into consumer products to report certain unpublished health and safety studies to EPA. Since the final rule's issuance, EPA has received a number of letters, including requests for withdrawal, asking questions and raising concerns about the scope and extent of the immediate final rule that indicate that there is significant confusion and uncertainty about the final rule in certain industrial sectors subject to the final rule. EPA believes that some of the points raised in the letters warrant additional consideration by the Agency.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Reissue of PM2.5 Determination For Milwaukee-Racine, Wisconsin Area

EPA has proposed to determine that the Milwaukee-Racine, Wisconsin area had attained the 2006 24-hour fine particle (2006 PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and to more clearly explain EPA's interpretation on the applicability of CFR 51.1004(c) to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

As background, on April 24, 2012, EPA published a proposed determination that the Milwaukee-Racine, Wisconsin area had attained the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA received comments on the original proposal suggesting that the suspension of certain Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements cannot be applied in this instance because it only pertains to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and not to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. As a result, EPA has reproposed portion of the original proposed determination to address this issue. EPA will address all comments received on the original proposal and the current reproposal in the Federal Register final notice. Comments must be received on or before January 28, 2013.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients in Wisconsin and nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Amendment For Diesel Sulfur Rule For Transmix and Pipelines

EPA has issued a final rule to amend provisions in the diesel sulfur fuel programs to provide necessary flexibility for transmix processors and pipeline operators who produce locomotive and marine diesel fuel. The diesel transmix amendments will reinstate an allowance for transmix processors and pipeline operators to produce 500 ppm sulfur diesel fuel for use in older technology locomotive and marine diesel outside of the Northeast Mid-Atlantic (NEMA) Area and Alaska after 2014.

These provisions were originally put in place as a necessary flexibility to address feasibility and cost issues associated with handling of the transmix volume generated in the pipeline distribution system. These provisions allowed the fuel distribution system to continue to function while transitioning to ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel (ULSD). The technology to economically reduce the sulfur content of transmix distillate product to 15 ppm at transmix processor and pipeline facilities did not exist, and any alternative measures of disposing of transmix were likewise deemed infeasible or cost prohibitive as the market was then configured. Thus, in order to implement the ULSD regulations, an outlet for the consumption of transmix distillate product was necessary. With no outlet, transmix would build up in storage tanks and pipelines would need to cease operations. When the ULSD standards were expanded to nonroad, locomotive, and marine (NRLM) diesel fuel, this would have removed the sole outlet in most areas of the country.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

EPA Summary of Enforcement Actions In 2012

On December 17, 2012, US EPA released its annual enforcement results. In 2012, EPA levied $252 million in civil and criminal penalties. According to EPA, the FY 2012 results include:

• Sustained and focused enforcement attention on serious violators of clean drinking water standards has resulted in improvements in compliance. The number of systems with serious violations has declined by more than 60 % in the past three years as a result of combined federal and state enforcement work, protecting people's health through safer drinking water.

• More than 67 % of large combined sewer systems are implementing solutions to reduce raw sewage and contaminated stormwater. EPA is working with communities to design integrated solutions to these water quality problems, and incorporating innovative and cost effective green infrastructure to save money and achieve multiple community benefits.

• EPA is bringing criminal prosecutions where criminal activity threatens public health, like failing to use required pollution control equipment or knowingly violating pollution rules resulting in death or serious harm or falsifying pollution information.

• EPA is advancing environmental justice by incorporating fenceline monitoring, which requires companies to monitor their air emissions and make that data available public, into settlements, ensuring that local residents have access to information about pollution that may be affecting their community. EPA also secured $44 million in additional investments through settlements for supplemental environmental projects that benefit impacted communities.

• EPA is increasing transparency to use the power of public accountability to help improve environmental compliance. EPA's 2012 enforcement actions map provides information about violators in communities. EPA's state dashboards and Clean Water Act pollutant loading tool provides the public with information about local pollution that may affect them and allows the public to take a closer look at how government is responding to pollution problems.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Final Boiler and Process Heater NESHAP Released

On December 21, 2012, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released air pollution rules regulating hazardous air emissions from industrial boilers and process heaters. This package of combustion rules includes a revised version of the Industrial Boiler Maximum-Achievable Control Technology standard (Boiler MACT).

The final combustion rule package addresses major and area source industrial boilers, as well as commercial and industrial solid waste incinerators (CISWI). These rules provide new emissions limits, compliance dates and important clarifications on how the rules are to be implemented. The rule package also includes guidance for defining whether non-hazardous secondary materials (NHSM) are to be considered a solid waste or a fuel, which is a critical decision for determining whether combustion of such materials must be regulated under the generally more stringent incinerator CISWI rules or the revised Boiler MACT rules.

Read a summary of the key changes from the March 2011 rules

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 

ADEQ SIP For Regional Haze Program

EPA is proposing to approve in part and disapprove in part a revision of Arizona's State Implementation Plan (SIP) to implement the regional haze program for the first planning period through July 31, 2018. This proposed action includes all portions of the SIP except for three electric generating stations that were addressed in a final rule published in the Federal Register on December 5, 2012. The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to adopt and submit to EPA SIPs that assure reasonable progress toward the national goal of achieving natural visibility conditions in 156 national parks and wilderness areas designated as Class I areas.

EPA is taking action on Arizona's Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) control analysis and determinations, Reasonable Progress Goals (RPGs) for the State's 12 Class I areas, Long-term Strategy (LTS), and other elements of the State's regional haze plan. If EPA takes final action to disapprove any portion of the SIP, EPA will work with the State to develop plan revisions to address the disapproved provisions.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 

 

Proposed Action On Wisconsin PM2.5 SIP

EPA is proposing to disapprove a revision to Wisconsin's State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) in a letter dated May 12, 2011. The revision concerns permitting requirements relating to particulate matter of less than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5). EPA is proposing to disapprove the revisions because they do not meet the 2008 PM2.5 SIP requirements.

As background, in May 2008 EPA finalized regulations to implement the New Source Review (NSR) Implementation Rule for PM2.5 to include the major source threshold, significant emissions rate and offset ratios for PM2.5, interpollutant trading for offsets and applicability of NSR to PM2.5 precursors. On October 20, 2010, EPA amended the requirements for PM2.5 under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program by adding maximum allowable increase in ambient pollutant concentrations and screening tools known as the Significant Impact Levels and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC) for PM2.5.

On May 12, 2011, Wisconsin requested a revision to its SIP to include new permit requirements relating to PM2.5. The provisions were designed to match the requirements set forth in the May 2008 and October 2010 rules. The submittal included permanent rules to define major source thresholds and significant emission increase levels; establish the SMC for PM2.5; establish interpollutant trading ratios for PM2.5, sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX); and clarify existing nonattainment area permitting rules.

On July 21, 2011, EPA announced a change in its policy concerning the development and adoption of interpollutant trading provisions for PM2.5. The new policy requires that any ratio involving PM2.5 precursors submitted to EPA for approval for use in a state's interpollutant offset program for PM2.5 nonattainment areas must be accompanied by a technical demonstration that shows the net air quality benefits of such a ratio for the PM2.5 nonattainment area in which it will be applied. In a letter dated March 5, 2012, WDNR requested to withdraw its request to have NR 408.06(1)(cm), the provision pertaining to interpollutant trading ratios, included in its 2011 submittal.

EPA has evaluated WDNR's proposed revisions to the Wisconsin SIP in accordance with the Federal requirements governing state permitting programs. EPA is proposing to disapprove these revisions because they do not meet all the requirements of the 2008 rules. According to EPA, Wisconsin's current SIP does not contain the explicit language to account for PM2.5 and PM10 condensables in permitting decisions, as codified in 51.166(b)(49)(vi) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(vi), and to date, the State has not made a submission with such revisions.

EPA is proposing to disapprove the revisions to Wisconsin rules NR 400, 404, 405, 406, 407, 408 and 484, submitted by the State on May 12, 2011, for approval into the SIP. The full or partial disapproval of a SIP revision triggers the requirement under section 110(c) that EPA promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) no later than two years from the date of the disapproval unless the state corrects the deficiency, and the Administrator approves the plan or plan revision before the Administrator promulgates such FIP.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 

 

GHG Permitting Program Approval Proposed For Arkansas

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed to approve the State of Arkansas’ program for permitting new facilities that will emit significant amounts of greenhouse gases (GHGs). If approved, the state’s program will replace a federal plan that had been in place since January 2011. The EPA proposed approval will be published in the Federal Register in 7 to 10 days and will available for public comment for 30 days.

Final approval would provide the State of Arkansas with authority to issue GHG permits and establish appropriate emissions levels for new or heavily modified GHG sources. These types of emissions are regulated under the Clean Air Act’s provisions to prevent new facilities from significantly decreasing air quality. EPA has been the GHG permitting authority in Arkansas since the state did not have such a program in place.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients in Arkansas and nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 

 

Final Annual PM2.5 Air Quality Standard

In response to a court order, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has finalized an update to its national air quality standards for fine particulate material (PM2.5), setting the annual health standard at 12 micrograms per cubic meter. The update has no effect on the existing daily standard for PM2.5 or the existing daily standard for coarse particles (PM10).

Fine particle pollution can penetrate deep into the lungs and has been linked to a wide range of serious health effects, including premature death, heart attacks, and strokes, as well as acute bronchitis and aggravated asthma among children. A federal court ruling required EPA to update the standard based on best available science.

By 2020, 99% of U.S. counties are projected to meet revised health standard without any additional actions. It is expected that fewer than 10 counties in the United States will need to consider any local actions to reduce fine particle pollution in order to meet the new standard by 2020, as required by the Clean Air Act.

The Clean Air Act requires EPA to review its air quality standards every five years to determine whether the standards should be revised. The law requires the agency to ensure the standards are “requisite to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety” and “requisite to protect the public welfare.” A federal court required EPA to issue final standard by December 14, because the agency did not meet its five-year legal deadline for reviewing the standards.
Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Performance Metrics For Integrity Management Programs

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued an Advisory Bulletin to operators of gas transmission and hazardous liquid pipeline facilities regarding their responsibilities under federal integrity management regulations to perform evaluations of their integrity management programs using meaningful performance metrics.

Advisory Bulletin (ADB-20l2-10) advises operators to critically review their processes and methods for evaluating integrity management program performance and take action to strengthen these processes where warranted. An effective operator performance evaluation process is expected to have the following characteristics:

• A well-defined description of the scope, objectives, and frequency of program evaluations.
• The use of periodic self-assessments, internal or external audits, management reviews, performance metrics analysis, benchmarking against other operators, or other self-critical evaluations to assess program effectiveness.
• Clear performance goals and objectives to measure the effectiveness of key integrity activities
• Clear assignment of responsibility for implementing required actions.
• Review and follow-up of program evaluation results, findings, and recommendations, etc., by appropriate company managers.

Operators are also advised that a clear and meaningful set of performance metrics is essential to program effectiveness. An effective program for measuring integrity management program effectiveness should have the following characteristics:

• A description of the type of performance measures to be used, along with the data sources, data validation and quality assurance activities, the frequency of data collection, and any normalization factors.
• A means to update the performance measures (if needed) to assure they are providing useful information about the effectiveness of integrity management program activities.
• The use of performance metrics data to check and calibrate the operator's risk analysis tools to assure these best represent the performance of the operator's specific assets.

The performance metrics that are required to be reported to PHMSA annually, such as the number of miles of pipeline assessed, number of anomalies found requiring repair or mitigation, etc., are a small subset of the overall suite of metrics used by an operator to evaluate its program. A much larger set of operator-specific metrics to be used internally is needed to effectively evaluate an integrity management program performance. Metrics should be developed for each of the following:

• Overall program effectiveness indicated by the number of releases, number of injuries or fatalities, volume released, etc.
• Specific threats that include both leading and lagging indicators for the important integrity threats on an operator's systems. These include:
  • Activity Measures that monitor the surveillance and preventive activities that are in place to control risk
  • Deterioration Measures that monitor operational and maintenance trends to indicate if the program is successful or weakening despite the risk control activities in place. (Also identified as Operational Measures in ASME B31.8S.
  • Failure Measures that reflect whether the program is effective in achieving the objective of improving integrity. (Also identified as Direct Integrity Measures in ASME B31.8S)
  • Metrics that measure and provide insights into how well an operator's processes associated with the various integrity management program elements are performing. Examples of such processes would include integrity assessment, risk analysis, the identification of preventive and mitigative measures, etc.

Finally, operators must keep records supporting the decisions, analyses, and processes developed and used in their evaluation of integrity management program effectiveness. These records should include those justifying the selection of performance metrics, the performance metric data and trends, and how these metrics are used to improve the integrity management program. Operators should also be diligently working to eliminate information and data gaps throughout their entire integrity management program.

Caltha LLP provides specialized EH&S expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Rules For NP and NPE Under TSCA and EPCRA 313

EPA has initiated rulemaking to restrict the use of nonylphenol (NP) and its ethoxylates (NPEs) under a proposed significant new use rule (SNUR) using existing Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authority and under the Emergency Preparedness and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). EPA plans to issue the proposal in the next year. NP and NPEs are used in industrial laundry detergents, oil spill dispersants, personal care products, industrial soaps, and other products, but the agency has raised concerns that the chemicals are highly toxic to aquatic life, environmentally persistent, moderately bioaccumulative and potential endocrine disruptors.

As part of the action plan, EPA is working with the industrial laundry industry to phase out that use of the chemicals by the end of 2014. The action plan also says the agency intends to encourage manufacturers of all NPE-containing direct-release products, such as firefighting gels and foams, dust-control agents and de-icers, to move to NPE-free formulations. Earlier this year the agency released an alternatives assessment for NP and NPEs through its Design for the Environment program that identified eight safer alternatives. The TSCA section 5 SNUR would serve as the next step under EPA's action plan, complementing the phaseout by restricting industry from reintroducing the chemical in new applications.

The SNUR would require persons who intend to manufacture, import, or process certain NP and NPE chemicals for an activity that is designated as a significant new use by the proposed rule to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing that activity. The notification would provide EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs to prevent unreasonable risk to human health or the environment.

The action plan also indicates EPA may add the chemicals to its EPCRA Section 313 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) list, and has proposed under TSCA section 5(b)(4) to put NPs and NPEs on a list of chemicals that present or may present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. The chemicals-of-concern list alone would have no regulatory consequences or trigger a rule.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards Reconsidered

US EPA has published a proposed rule to reconsider certain new source and startup and shutdown issues as they apply to the national air pollution standards for utilities and industrial steam-generating units. The NESHAP rule was issued under the Clean Air Act and is most often referred to as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). The new source performance standards (NSPS) being reconsidered are often referred to as the Utility NSPS.

EPA received petitions for reconsideration of aspects of the MATS and the Utility NSPS. In response, the Agency is reconsidering the requirements applicable during periods of startup and shutdown for MATS, the startup and shutdown provisions related to the particulate matter (PM) standard in the Utility NSPS, and certain revisions to "definitional and monitoring" provisions of the Utility NSPS. Finally, EPA is proposing technical corrections to the MATS and the Utility NSPS.

The Agency says it will accept comments on the aspects of the final MATS and Utility NSPS rules specifically identified in the Federal Register notice. Other aspects of the rules are not open for comment. Comments must be received on or before December 31, 2012.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

PCB Waste From Building Demolition - Reinterpretation of PCB Bulk and PCB Remediation Wastes

The EPA Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery has announced its intention to reinterpret its guidance regarding PCB-contaminated building materials.

In February 2012, the EPA solicited comment on a draft reinterpretation of its position regarding the status of PCB-contaminated building materials under the definition of PCB bulk product waste. EPA received several questions from the regulated community regarding the disposal and cleanup requirements for PCB-contaminated building materials. The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulations at 40 CFR 761 provide disposal and cleanup requirements for PCBs. The disposal and cleanup requirements for PCB-contaminated building material depend on whether the material is classified as a PCB bulk product waste or PCB remediation waste. Waste derived from caulk or paint containing PCBs at > 50 parts per million (ppm) is defined as PCB hulk product waste in 40 CFR 761.3. The definition of PCB bulk product waste includes -non-liquid bulk wastes or debris from the demolition of buildings and other man-made structures manufactured, coated, or serviced with PCBs." Other PCB bulk product wastes may include, but are not limited to, mastics, sealants, or adhesives containing PCBs at > 50 ppm. PCB remediation waste is defined as "waste containing PCBs as a result of a spill, release, or other unauthorized disposal...". and leaching may he considered a release of PCBs.

Current EPA guidance states that building material contaminated by the migration of PCBs from PCB bulk product waste, such as caulk or paint, is considered a PCB remediation waste. The proposed reinterpretation would have modified this guidance to specify that only PCB contaminated building material from which the PCB bulk product has been removed is a PCB remediation waste. Under the proposed reinterpretation, the distinction was made whether or not the PCB bulk product is still attached to the building materials.

The reinterpretation finalized in October 2012 allows building material (i.e., substrate) "coated or serviced" with PCB bulk product waste (e.g., caulk, paint, mastics, sealants) at the time of designation for disposal to be managed as a PCB bulk product waste, even if the PCBs have migrated from the overlying bulk product waste into the substrate, provided there is no other source of PCB contamination on or in the substrate. However, if the substrate is not "coated or serviced" (i.e.. the PCB bulk product waste, such as caulk or paint has been removed from the building material) at the time of designation for disposal, and the substrate is contaminated with PCBs that have migrated from the bulk product waste (or from another unauthorized disposal), the substrate would be considered a PCB remediation waste.

The current reinterpretation addresses the possibility that during a cleanup or demolition process, PCB bulk product waste (e.g.. caulk, paint. mastics, and sealants) could separate from the contaminated building material before all of the waste is physically placed in the final disposal facility. At the time of designation for disposal, the contaminated building material would be deemed a PCB bulk product waste if the PCB material (e.g.. caulk, paint, mastic or sealant) is still attached. This label as PCB bulk product waste would stay with the contaminated building materials. EPA recommends developing an abatement plan to document the decision to designate building materials as bulk product waste at the time of designation for disposal. If the PCB material has already been removed or flaked off at the time of designation for disposal, the building material would be deemed a PCB remediation waste, as established under the existing interpretations.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 

 

EPA Denies Waiver From Renewable Fuels Standard

On November 16, EPA announced that it has not found evidence to support a finding of severe “economic harm” that would warrant granting a waiver of the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS). The Agency says the decision is based on economic analyses and modeling done in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

To support the waiver decision, EPA conducted several economic analyses. Economic analyses of impacts in the agricultural sector, conducted with USDA, showed that on average waiving the mandate would only reduce corn prices by approximately 1%. Economic analyses of impacts in the energy sector, conducted with DOE, showed that waiving the mandate would not impact household energy costs.

EPA found that the evidence and information failed to support a determination that implementation of the RFS mandate during the 2012-2013 time period would severely harm the economy of a State, a region, or the United States, the standard established by Congress in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct).

The EPAct required EPA to implement a renewable fuels standard to ensure that transportation fuel sold in the United States contains a minimum volume of renewable fuel. A waiver of the mandate requires EPA, working with USDA and DOE, to make a finding of "severe economic harm" from the RFS mandate itself.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

CERCLA Section 120 Federal Facilities Hazardous Waste Report Updated

On November 6, 2012, EPA published the update of the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket. The Agency has maintained the Docket since 1988 under Section 120(c) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Section 120(c) requires EPA to establish a Docket that contains information reported to EPA by federal facilities that manage hazardous wastes or from which a reportable quantity of hazardous substances has been released. The Docket is used to identify federal facilities that should be evaluated to determine if they pose a threat to public health or welfare and the environment and to provide a mechanism to make this information available to the public.

The newly published Docket identifies federal facilities not previously listed on the Docket and reported to EPA since the Docket was last updated on October 13, 2010. In addition to the list of additions, the notice includes a section with revisions of the previous Docket list. The revisions in the update include 52 additions and 17 deletions, as well as 19 corrections to the Docket since the previous update. The new total number of federal facilities listed on the Docket stands at 2,334.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Stay Proposed For Final MATS Rule

EPA has announced that the agency is reviewing new technical information associated with the new source limits for toxics emitted from new power plants under the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). According to EPA, the new information indicates that there may be technical challenges associated with monitoring mercury emissions at the levels set for new power plants.

These new plants would continue to rely on the same proven pollution control technologies to reduce mercury, acid gases, and particle pollution. The agency believes this information warrants further review and will follow an expedited, open, and transparent process that includes public comment on any proposed changes. The agency will also use its Clean Air Act authority to stay the final standards for new power plants for 90 days during this technical review.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. 
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

RFS Renewable Identification Number (RIN) Quality Assurance Program

Under the Clean Air Act, US EPA is responsible for developing and implementing regulations to ensure that transportation fuel sold in the United States contains a minimum volume of renewable fuel. The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program regulations finalized in 2007 (RFS1) and 2010 (RFS2) were developed in collaboration with refiners, renewable fuel producers, and many other stakeholders.

The RFS compliance program is based on the use of unique renewable identification numbers (RINs) assigned to batches of renewable fuel by renewable fuel producers and importers. These RINs can then be sold or traded, and used by any obligated party to demonstrate compliance with the applicable standard.

According to EPA, it has recently come to the agency’s attention that the production, transfer, and use of invalid RINs has resulted in violations for parties that were not aware that the RINs were invalid. To address this, EPA is considering development of a rule will propose a voluntary mechanism for ensuring that RINs have been appropriately generated. No schedule for the proposed rulemaking was released


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Wool Fiberglass Area Source NESHAP Chromium Emissions

In 2012 under a Section 114 letter, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received responses from wool fiberglass companies which conducted furnace emissions testing for chromium compounds. According to EPA, the industry data show that wool fiberglass area sources emit chromium from all furnace types. Emissions of chromium compounds from the wool fiberglass industry's area sources total over 50 pounds per year.

Additionally, one major source facility is expected to become an area source through changes to a process downstream and independent of the furnace; one furnace at that source has been measured as emitting over 500 pounds per year of chromium compounds. Based on these data, EPA plans to list and regulate area sources in the wool fiberglass source category for all processes that emit HAP.

A schedule for development of this source category National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) was not released by EPA.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 

 

Small Business Review of Reinforced Plastic Composites Production NESHAP

US EPA has proposed to review and revise, if needed, the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) standard for Reinforced Plastic Composites Production. The EPA promulgated NESHAP for reinforced plastic composites production on April 21, 2003. The final rule (40 CFR part 63, subpart WWWW) includes standards for both new and existing sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP), as well as monitoring, performance testing, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements related to those standards.

The NESHAP regulates production and ancillary processes used to manufacture products with thermoset resins and gel coats. The final standards contain a HAP emissions threshold that distinguishes between sources that typically can meet the HAP emissions limits using pollution prevention, and those that must use add-on controls.

Based on SBA size definitions and reported sales and employment data, EPA identified 279 of the 357 companies owning reinforced plastic composites facilities as small businesses. EPA performed an economic impact analysis (EIA) that indicated that 12 % of facilities owned by small business were at risk of closure because of the final rule. A Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) panel had recommended that EPA provide special flexibility to these companies. Provisions to reduce the adverse impact on small business, including minimized reporting and recordkeeping requirements and establishing separate floors for specialty products, were incorporated into the final rule.

In the Federal Register notice EPA announced it will review this action pursuant to section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 610). As part of this review, EPA will consider and solicit comments on the following factors: (1) The continued need for the rule; (2) the nature of complaints or comments received concerning the rule; (3) the complexity of the rule; (4) the extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other Federal, State, or local government rules; and (5) the degree to which the technology, economic conditions or other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule.

Comments on the proposed review must be received by EPA within 60 days of the notice, which was dated October 31, 2012.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

MATS Rule Reconsideration Request

A group of fossil fuel power generation developers have petitioned the U.S. District Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia to either expedite their case against the Environmental Protection Agency or order the agency to meet a deadline for revising the requirements of its Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). The developers originally sued the EPA over the requirements of the MATS program, which they contend are too burdensome and cannot be met in time for a variety of new coal- and oil-fired project to qualify for an exemption from the EPA's New Source Performance Standards (NSPS).

The court initially agreed with the developers, but in September put the case in abeyance while the EPA reconsidered the controversial parts of the MATS rules, with a deadline for finalizing changes by March 2013. The developers want to resolve the case  so they can meet the April 12, 2013 compliance deadline for exemption from NSPS. The developers are asking the court to issue a court order by November 15 that would force the EPA to comply with the March 2013 deadline or expedite the case so it can be resolved earlier.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Compliance Deadline For Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources NESHAP Put On Hold

EPA says it will publish a final rule in an upcoming Federal Register placing a "stay" on revisions to emissions standards for chemical manufacturing area sources (CMAS). The stay effectively places the rule on hold.

In January 2012, EPA issued a proposed rule reconsidering provisions in the final National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for CMAS. The compliance date for the final CMAS rule is October 29, 2012. However, EPA is still in the process of finalizing the reconsideration action and needs more time to complete it. The rule, as found at 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart VVVVVV will be on hold until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register.

EPA had originally published the final CMAS rule in 2009, but petitioners asked the Agency to reconsider certain provisions in the rule. The January 2012 proposed reconsiderations include provisions that, if finalized, would revise the applicability of the final rule.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

 

Proposed Revision To Colorado Tank Rules

The Colorado Department of Labor and Employment (CDLE) – Division of Oil and Public Safety (OPS) is proposing changes to all Articles of regulation 7 CCR 1101-14, Storage Tank Regulations. These proposed changes include some technical changes (additions or changes of existing requirements) and to clarifications.

Some of the key proposed changes include:
Article 1 – General Provisions
• Add some definitions from statutes or from existing regulation Articles.
• Add a Glossary of terms.
• Clarified the definition of “Owner”.

Article 1.5 (New) – Motor Fuel Dispensing, Weights and Measures, and Product Quality
• Add a Motor Fuel Dispensing and Weights and Measures Article describing current requirements.

Article 2 – Underground Storage Tanks
• Clarify UST systems that are exempt from the Regulations.
• Clarify “Determination of Ownership and Use”.
• Remove specifics of what is required on the installation application and defaulted to the current application for these specifics.
• Added the requirement to conduct an assessment during repairs of subsurface portions of a UST system.
• Add out of service requirements to add flexibility for tank owners with systems that operate seasonally.

Article 3 – Aboveground Storage Tanks
• Added a new table describing restricted-capacity fleet vehicle motor fuel dispensing operations.

Article 4 – Release Reporting, Investigation, and Confirmation
• Define water in tank as two inches or more.
• Define suspected release in containment equipment as when fuel is in contact with penetration points, and add a requirement for hydrotesting of spill containment in response to this suspected release.
• Add a requirement for a site check in response to inconclusive SIR results.
• Add a requirement for a site check in response to a failed system test.

Article 5 – Release Response and Corrective Action
• Remove parameters of calculating site-specific target levels. This information will be included in the Guidance Document.
• Clarify that the responsibility for addressing releases remains with the owner/operator who owned the tank system at the time of the release.
• Add requirement to assess groundwater in response to a confirmed release.
• Add specifications for pilot testing.
• Add specific conditions to be met prior to requesting no further action.

Article 6 - Enforcement
• Add a description of the enforcement process which is currently employed.

Article 8 – Petroleum Storage Tank Fund
• Add language specifying that an owner/operator who is reimbursed for cleanup costs must remain in operational compliance to continue to be reimbursed.
• Add language specifying reimbursement/invoice format requirements.
• Add the requirement that applications for reimbursement of costs must be submitted within 5 years of incurring the costs.
• Add “unallowed status” for costs, associated with fees or other payments, incurred to obtain access to off-site properties.
• Add “unallowed status” for costs associated with the rental of equipment owned by the applicant if the purchase of the equipment was previously reimbursed.
• Add requirement to send an application back to the Committee for review if the facility is out of operational compliance.
• Add a description of the “Vendor Offset” policy.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

FERC Proposed Rulemaking To Reduce Reporting and Filings

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) announced on October 18 three proposed regulatory reform actions to ease the regulatory burdens on the natural gas and oil pipeline industries. The Commission issued three Notices of Proposed Rulemaking that would reduce the pipeline industries' regulatory burden:

• A proposal to eliminate 145 annual filings made by Natural Gas Act pipelines as a result of a change in the annual charge assessment unit surcharge;
• A proposal to streamline the processing of rate and other filings by intrastate pipelines performing interstate service under section 311 of the Natural Gas Policy Act and Hinshaw pipelines; and
• A proposal to eliminate oil pipelines' unnecessary filings, update requirements for service, and update requirements for posting tariff information.

Comments on each proposal are due 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

FERC staff also issued a report that identifies minor revisions to the Commission's natural gas pipeline regulations that may be appropriate to remove reporting requirements that no longer serve their intended purpose. The report was issued pursuant to the Nov. 8, 2011, Plan for Retrospective Analysis of Existing Rules prepared in response to Executive Order 13579, which requested independent regulatory agencies issue plans for periodic retrospective analysis of their existing regulations. Comments on the FERC staff report are due November 18.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Proposed Changes To GHG Estimating Method Used By Electronics Manufacturers

US EPA is proposing to change the manner which electronics manufacturers calculate and monitor their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The proposed rule, “GHG Reporting Program: Proposed amendments and confidentiality determinations for Subpart I,” was published in the October 16 Federal Register. Proposed changes include revising calculation methods and adding a new method, amending data reporting requirements, and clarifying terms and definitions. The Agency will accept comments until December 17, 2012.

The action also proposes confidentiality determinations for the reporting of the new and revised data elements. EPA said that many of the proposed actions are in response to a petition to reconsider specific aspects of the regulations.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Revision To IDEM Underground Storage Tank Rules

Indiana Department of Environmental Management has revised its Underground Storage Tank Regulations under Senate Bill 168. The rule, which took effect July 1, added a new code section IC 13-23-7-10. The State may now impose a lien on the property of an owner or operator of an underground storage tank, if they fail to register or pay certain fees.

IDEM must: (1) provide 30 days written notice before filing a lien; and (2) perfect a lien by recording the lien with the county recorder in the county in which the property is located. The bill also added a new section to IC 13-23-8-4 that allows a bona fide purchaser eligibility to receive funds from the underground storage tank excess liability trust fund if the transferee pays past due fees of the transferor in certain circumstances.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.

For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 
 

Approval For Texas New Source Review Program

On October 11, EPA approved revisions to the Texas permitting program for major air pollution sources under the Clean Air Act's New Source Review (NSR) program. According to EPA, changes submitted by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), increase regulatory certainty and efficiency while ensuring public health and the environment are protected. The revised plan provides industry with operating flexibility by establishing site-wide emission caps known as "Plant-wide Applicability Limits," or PALS, for existing sources. These PALS require continuous monitoring for each of the units included in the cap.

According to EPA, this final approval of the state's revised plan enhances the clarity and enforceability of state issued permits and also provides industry with flexibility to meet Clean Air Act requirements, while ensuring environmental protection. The adopted rules are fully consistent with federal requirements and consistent with NSR reform rules approved by EPA for other states in the country.

Congress established NSR permitting program as part of the 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments. NSR is a preconstruction permitting program that protects air quality while allowing for industrial growth. In Texas, NSR permits are legal documents issued by the TCEQ that facility owners/operators must abide by. The permit specifies what construction is allowed, what emission limits must be met, and often how the emissions source must be operated.
Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Pre-notification Requirements For Natural Gas Wells

On April 17, 2012, EPA issued new regulations under the Clean Air Act to reduce air emissions from the oil and natural gas industry. The final rule included the first federal air standards for natural gas wells that are hydraulically fractured. Key provisions in the rule call for "green completions" or reduced emission completions (RECs). Many of the new requirements in the rule become effective in January 2015; however, the pre-notification requirements of the rule go into effect on October 15, 2012.

The pre-notification requirements include sending an email to EPA no later than 2 days prior to completion following the hydraulic fracturing or refracturing of a gas well. The notification must include geographic coordinates of the affected wells and the estimated date that well completion will begin. According to the Agency, well owners and operators who are subject to state advance notice requirements for well completions can meet EPA's requirements by meeting the state notification requirements.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Amendment To Renewable Fuel Standard Proposed

EPA has announced plans to provide additional clarifications, modifications, and technical amendments to the Renewable Fuel Standard and to clarify, modify and technically amend other fuels programs. The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) 2 program was required by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), which amended the Clean Air Act (CAA). The final regulations for RFS2 were published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2010. EPA has previously published clarifications and modifications, technical amendments, and new pathways to the final RFS2 regulations.

This proposed regulation would provide additional clarifications, modifications, and technical amendments to RFS2 and will clarify, modify and technically amend other fuels programs in 40 CFR Part 80. This proposed action would also propose amendments to Table 1 to Section 80.1426 of the RFS2 regulations to include additional fuel pathways and assign each pathway a D-Code. It would allow producers or importers of fuel produced under these pathways to generate Renewable Identification Numbers under the program, providing that the fuel meets the other requirements for renewable fuel.

This proposed action would outline EPA's lifecycle greenhouse gas evaluation, specified in Clean Air Act section 211(o), as amended by EISA for several new pathways. This proposed action would then add these pathways to the table of approved fuel pathways.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

NSPS Review For Kraft Pulp Mills Planned

EPA has announced its intent to conduct a technical review of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) applicable to kraft pulp mills. Section 111(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) directs EPA to review and, if appropriate, revise the New Source Performance Standards at least every 8 years after promulgation. This is a review of Subpart BB, Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mills Section 60.280 - 60.285 which was last revised in 1978.

The subpart is applicable to the following sources in kraft pulp mills that were installed after 1978: digester systems, brown stock washers, evaporator systems, recovery furnaces, smelt dissolving tanks, lime kilns, and condensate stripper systems. The pollutants regulated in this subpart include total reduced sulfur (TRS) compounds and particulate matter (PM).

This action is subject to a citizen suit under section 304(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act brought against the US EPA under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5. U.S.C. 701-06. This complaint seeks to compel the agency to fulfill its mandatory duty to review the NSPS for new and modified kraft pulp mills.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Use of Biofuels To Meet Boiler MACT Rejected

EPA has rejected efforts to expand the renewable fuel standard (RFS) to permit heating oil biofuels used in boilers and power production to earn credit under the RFS. The decision was a setback for industries seeking the expansion as a way to ease compliance with EPA's pending boiler air toxics rule by using the lower-emitting oil.

EPA says fuel oils used to generate process heat, power, or other functions are not eligible for renewable identification number (RIN) credits that industry uses to adhere to the RFS, contending that these fuels are not within the scope of the definition of "home heating oil" that can qualify for the RFS as stipulated in the 2007 energy law. EPA's rule only expands the scope of existing fuels that qualify as heating oil under the RFS to qualify for credits under the standard. Thus far EPA has only permitted heating oil used in residential homes to gain RIN credits, but the rule expands that definition to include larger commercial buildings.

EPA is amending its boiler maximum achievable control technology (MACT) air toxics rule and an associated emissions standard for commercial and solid waste incinerators in response to industry comments that the original versions of the rules are too tough and would impose significant costs. Biofuel firms claim using their lower-emitting fuel to power boilers applicable to the MACT would help industries cut costs and make the rule achievable. Permitting biofuel heating oils used in boilers to qualify under the RFS would help spur a market for the fuels and boost the number of producers.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

Significant New Use Rules Issued For 107 Chemicals

On September 21, EPA published significant new use rules (SNURs) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for 107 chemical substances that were the subject of premanufacture notices. Eight of the chemicals are also subject to TSCA consent orders issued by EPA. The rule is effective on November 20, 2012.

Under the new SNURs, anyone who intends to manufacture, import, or process any of the listed 107 chemical substances for any activity that EPA designates as a significant new use must notify EPA at least 90 days before beginning the activity. EPA will, in turn, evaluate the intended activity, and, if necessary, prohibit or limit the activity before it occurs.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website

 

Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act

Congress passed the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Establishment Act, on September 22, 2012, and forwarded it to the President for his signature on September 25, 2012. The E-manifest Act amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act by requiring EPA to establish a hazardous waste electronic manifest system within three years. The system must allow any person that is currently required to use a paper manifest to elect to complete and transmit an electronic manifest format.

Congress also authorized EPA to impose fees on users to pay for developing, maintaining, and upgrading the e-manifest system, including any costs that come from collecting and processing data from paper manifests submitted once the e-system is up and running. The fees are to be deposited into the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System Fund, a revolving fund established by the Act. Congress authorized appropriations for the program for FY2013-FY2015 for start-up activities to carry out the Act.

Currently, hazardous waste generators must complete the paper Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest any time they transport, or offer for transport, hazardous waste for off-site treatment, recycling, storage, or disposal. The manifest is designed to track the waste from the time it leaves the generator where it was produced, until it reaches the off-site waste management facility. The paper manifest consists of multiple copies of a single form, which when completed contains information on the type and quantity of waste, instructions for handling the waste, and signature lines for all parties involved in the generation, transportation, and ultimate disposition of the waste. The paper manifest, required by both EPA and the Department of Transportation, is a standard federal form. States may not develop their own versions of the form.


Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 
 

Photovoltaic - Solar Modules Proposed As California Universal Waste

California Department of Toxic Substance Control has proposed regulations to add photovoltaic - solar modules as a category under the Universal Waste regulations. Solar modules are a form of photovoltaic technology where a semiconductor material, such as silicon, cadmium telluride or copper indium selenium, is encapsulated between two sheets of tempered glass. Solar modules are relatively simple, being comprised predominantly of a silicon or semiconductor substrate, which for thin–film modules is a thin layer of two or more metal– based semiconductors applied to the surface of glass. Solar modules are likely to exhibit the characteristic of toxicity due to heavy metals (such as cadmium, copper, lead, and selenium) and thus would be classified as hazardous waste, if disposed.

Currently, the volume of waste solar modules in California is very small with the exact number unknown. However, with the increase in deployment of solar modules throughout the state to meet its increasing energy needs, as well as meet the renewable energy goals established by the Governor, that volume of waste solar modules is anticipated to increase at a steady rate over the next 20 years.

The broad objectives of the DTSC regulations are to:

• Establish a conditional exemption in section 66261.6 (recyclable materials) for non–RCRA hazardous waste solar modules that are collected, transported and recycled by being reclaimed as part of a reclamation program administered by a solar module vendor (as defined in the proposed regulations).
• Designate hazardous waste solar modules, that are either RCRA hazardous waste or non–RCRA hazardous waste, as universal waste provided that the solar modules are recycled, not disposed, and are managed in accordance with the existing requirements of chapter 23 (Standards for Universal Waste Management).
• Maintain the existing hazardous waste requirement for recycling activities, including reclamation activities and other forms of hazardous waste treatment activities, which require a hazardous waste facility permit or other grant of authorization from DTSC.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 

 

Emission Standards For Area Source Chemical Production Facilities

EPA has sent a pending final rule revising emissions standards for smaller "area" source chemical production facilities for White House review, after taking comment on a proposed version of the rule that industry argued would impose significant cost for little environmental benefits. The pending final rule, which EPA submitted to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), will revise the agency's 2009 national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for chemical manufacturing area sources.

Area sources are those below the "major" source threshold of emitting 10 tons per year (tpy) of a hazardous air pollutant (HAP), or 25 tpy of any combination of HAPs. OMB review, which typically takes 90 days, is the last major step before EPA can sign the rule and publish it in the Federal Register.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website
 

Final Air Toxics Rule For Chromium Electroplating Facilities

The final air toxics rule for chromium electroplating facilities, issued Aug. 15 by US EPA, rejected industry and environmentalists' requests to revise key provisions. The final rule closely follows the proposed version. The final rule concludes that a technology review of the chromium electroplating and steel pickling industry determined that new techniques are available to further lower air toxics from facilities at a "reasonable cost".

EPA also studied remaining health risks from the sector, and consequently tightened emissions limits for hexavalent chromium (Cr+6) emissions, to reduce cancer risks from covered facilities. The rule fulfills EPA's mandate under the Clean Air Act to conduct a residual risk review of air toxics controls for the sector. The Clean Air Act requires the performance of the review eight years following implementation of a national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) to determine remaining health risks from a sector's emissions. EPA must amend the existing NESHAP if a review finds justification for tighter controls.

EPA estimates that the revised NESHAP will cut hexavalent chromium emissions by 224 pounds annually. It also says many facilities are already reaching the revised hexavalent chromium limit, or emitting under the limit. The final rule finalized the agency's plan for a three-year phase out of the use of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) as a method for reducing hexavalent chromium emissions from hard chromium electroplating, decorative chromium electroplating, and chromium anodizing tanks.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 
 

Public Meeting On Proposed National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for Perchlorate

EPA will hold a public meeting and a webcast to share information with the public related to treatment technologies, analytical methods, and other information on the development of a proposed National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for Perchlorate. Perchlorate is a naturally occurring and man-made chemical that is used to produce rocket fuel, fireworks, flares, and explosives. It is sometimes used to produce bleach and certain fertilizers. Scientific research suggests perchlorate can have adverse health effects, including disrupting the thyroid's ability to produce hormones needed for normal growth and development.

EPA says it anticipates publishing its proposed rule for regulating perchlorate for public review and comment in 2013.

The public meeting and webcast will take place on September 20, 2012, from 10 am to 4 pm (EST), in Arlington, Virginia. Anyone wishing to participate in the in-person meeting must register in advance no later than 5 pm EST on September 17, 2012. Seating is limited and will be available on a first-come, first-served basis for those persons registered. Webcast participants must register in advance; EPA says the number of connections available of the webcast is also limited and will be available on a first-come, first-served basis.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs.
For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website 
 

State Pipeline Damage Prevention Program Grants

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) announced over $1.5 million in grants to 22 states to strengthen and support pipeline damage prevention programs. States will use the damage prevention grants to continue implementation of the nine elements of an effective damage prevention program, outlined in the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement and Safety Act of 2006. Program elements include effective communications, partnerships, fair and consistent enforcement, training and technology.

Excavation damage is the number one cause of pipeline accidents resulting in fatality or injury. Since 2002, excavation damage resulted in over $190 million in property damage nationwide. Between 2002 and 2011, more than 28 % of all serious pipeline accidents were caused by excavation damage, resulting in 38 fatalities and 148 injuries.

Caltha LLP provides specialized expertise to clients nationwide in the evaluation environmental rules, developing EHS compliance procedures, and preparing cost-effective EHS management programs. For further information contact Caltha LLP at info@calthacompany.com or Caltha LLP Website